On November 23, 1963, the day after John F. Kennedy’s assassination, Fidel Castro gave a talk on Cuban radio and television.[1] He pulled together, as well as he could in the amount of time available to him, the evidence he had gathered from news media and other sources, and he reflected on this evidence.
In August of 2016, a former employee of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) began looking into the reports his agency had released years earlier on the collapse of the World Trade Center. What he found shook him to the core. In this half-hour interview, Peter Michael Ketcham tells of his personal journey toward reluctantly concluding his employers of 14 years had deliberately suppressed the truth about the most pivotal event of the 21st century.
A few months back, Europhysics News, the science journal that published the new study “On the Physics of High Rise Building Collapse”, by Jones et al (republished here on OffG), published an interesting range of follow up letters to the editor. Less widely publicised has been an announcement in the same edition from its editors that reads like a declaration of political censorship. The small collection of “letters to the editor” published in a recent edition of Europhysics News as a follow-up to the Jones et al paper “On the Physics of High Rise Building Collapse” is revelatory on several levels. Not only for the range of views expressed, but also, and perhaps most significantly, as a statement on the level of censorship and self-censorhip currently deemed acceptable in academia. The letter that received most attention in the alt media is from a “member of the NIST technical staff during the period 1997 – 2011,” and alleging “the more I investigated, the more apparent it became that NIST had reached a predetermined conclusion by ignoring, …
from ae911truth.org Two days ago, Europhysics News released its first issue since the publication of “15 years later: On the physics of high-rise building collapses,” which has now been viewed nearly 350,000 times since its release — and which even caused the magazine’s server to break down at one point. Lo and behold, on page 43 is a startling and extraordinary letter to the editor by a former employee of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Peter Michael Ketcham, who worked at NIST from 1997 until 2011. In his letter, Mr. Ketcham makes it clear that he did not contribute to NIST’s World Trade Center investigation. In fact, it wasn’t until last August that he began reading the NIST WTC reports and watching documentaries challenging NIST’s findings. The more he investigated, he writes, “the more it became apparent that NIST had reached a predetermined conclusion by ignoring, dismissing, and denying the evidence.” Mr. Ketcham closes his stunning 500-word rebuke by calling upon NIST to “blow the whistle on itself now” before awareness of …
by Philip Giraldi at the Unz Review Here Giraldi argues – as we do at OffG – that, whether or not one believes 9/11 was an inside job, there are enough lacunae and inconsistencies in the official investigations by FEMA and NIST that a new inquiry is essential For the first time a presidential candidate, admittedly from a fringe party, is calling for a reexamination of 9/11. Jill Stein of the Green Party has recognized that exercises in which the United States government examines its own behavior are certain to come up with a result that basically exonerates the politicians and the federal bureaucracy. This has been the case since the Warren Commission report on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which, inter alia, failed to thoroughly investigate key players like Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby and came up with a single gunman scenario in spite of considerable evidence to the contrary. When it comes to 9/11, I have been reluctant to enter the fray largely because I do not have the scientific …
by Kevin Ryan Eleven years ago, I initiated a discussion about the fact that jet fuel fires could not have melted steel at the World Trade Center. The government agency investigating the WTC destruction responded by holding “some of its deliberations in secret.” Although it’s not a secret that jet fuel can’t melt steel, due to propaganda from sources like The Washington Post and The Huffington Post, Americans often get confused about what facts like that mean to any national discussion. In a nutshell, what it means is that the molten metal found at the WTC, for which there is a great deal of evidence, cannot be explained by the official 9/11 myth. Today no one thinks that jet fuel fires can melt steel beams—not even The Posts’ new science champion, who doesn’t bother to actually use jet fuel or steel beams to teach us about “retarded metallurgical things.” Instead, he uses a thin metal rod and a blacksmith forge to imply that, if the WTC buildings were made of thin metal rods and there …
By Petra Liverani Gatekeeping is the term used to describe the process of deciding which information will go forward and which will not. It is to be expected that the mass media/corporate/government triumvirate are strict and vigilant gatekeepers but what is puzzling, to me at least, is that certain progressive intellectuals, who are generally very critical of that triumvirate and who are regarded as important voices in keeping its members to account, also practise gatekeeping but only on a few, though vitally important, issues. A case in point is the truth about 9/11. The crimes of 9/11 involved a massive conspiracy, planned many years in advance, which have had severe and worsening repercussions; many of us despair and feel quite helpless about what can be done about the spreading of war and terror throughout the globe. However, there is one relatively straightforward action that can be taken, if only the gatekeepers will allow it: “When the big lie regarding the 9/11 attacks is exposed and understood, the legitimacy of America’s military agenda falls like a …
by Bryan Kinnear I heartily commend OffG for hosting their 9/11 series; most sites tend to be polarised as either pro or con – it is a rare opportunity for both sides to air simultaneously. I also commend Jerome and Carroll for largely driving one side of the argument; and in particular to Carroll for his diligent and detailed research. I concur that the jury is still out regarding nano-thermite and that further studies are required to verify this. This, in itself is in line with the Harrit et al paper. [1] In agreeing that Carroll has done valuable work and broadened the debate, I however also believe that he then goes too far in his hypothesis. Where I begin to diverge is in the production of what I would term an “If Chewbacca lives on Endor – you must acquit”; [2] a type of non sequitur argument with a fallacious conclusion – that no thermite = no CD = fire collapse. To my mind, he has at most highlighted that the mechanism of collapse …
The comments on our John Gross article are becoming massively unwieldy so we are opening this thread for continuation of the discussion on this or any other 9/11 issues. Please feel free to contribute any thoughts but try to source your claims of fact
Kevin Ryan is one of the most prominent members of the 9/11 Truth movement. He has written extensively on many of the apparent anomalies surrounding the events of that day, and currently runs his own blog at digwithin.net. In 2004 Ryan, a trained chemist, was an executive with Underwriters Laboratories, the company that had certified the steel used in the construction of the WTC. He became perturbed when he read that Dr. Hyman Brown “from the WTC construction crew” was claiming “that the buildings collapsed due to fires at 2000F melting the steel”. Since he knew the WTC steel his company had certified could not possibly melt at that temperature (and indeed Brown’s claims were later disavowed by NIST), Ryan emailed Dr Frank Gayle, who was heading NIST’s “WTC Project”, asking for clarifications and expressing his concerns. Ryan forwarded his email to veteran truth campaigner David Ray Griffin, who obtained permission to publish it on septembereleventh.org. A few days after the email appeared on the site Ryan was fired from Underwriters. The reason given by …
updated 6/10/16 with additional eyewitness testimony provided by our reader Jerome Fryer, for which we are extremely grateful Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the walls… Ken Holden, director NY Dept of Design & Construction, excerpted in video above This video shows John Gross, a NIST engineer who played a central role in the investigation of the WTC collapses, claiming he has seen no evidence of molten steel or excessively high temperatures in the WTC rubble. His interview – in which he displays obvious signs of discomfort – is intercut with eyewitnesses at Ground Zero describing red-hot, white-hot, or specifically “molten” steel in the rubble. Such eye-witnesses are numerous, too numerous to all be quoted in the video, and they include firefighters, structural engineers and physicists. Dr Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl was one. Permitted to examine some of the structural steel before it was taken away for melting down, he reported many anomalies: If you remember the Salvador Dali paintings with the clocks that are kind of melted–it’s kind of like that…That …
from The Mind Renewed The 2001 anthrax letter attacks in the United States killed five people and wounded dozens. They were widely blamed on extremist Muslims and their backers and used to support the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Shortly after 9/11, the US was once again gripped by fear as letters containing anthrax were sent through the post to news media offices and two US Senators, killing five and infecting perhaps dozens of others. Initially widely-blamed on Al Qaeda and Iraq, the attacks were used to jusify and accelerate the USA PATRIOT Act. But as evidence grew that the anthrax spores had originated in laboratories embedded in the US military-industrial complex, attention was diverted to looking for the “lone nut”; a quest that ended with a convenient suicide. But what, asks Dr. MacQueen, should we conclude from all the “intelligence” that supposedly pointed towards Al Qaeda and Iraq in the first place? Was it all error? Or was it, as he persuasively argues, a nexus of “faulty” intelligence, “prescient” media reports, “tips”, and astonishing …
by Mog I started reading OffGuardian shortly after it set up, following a link from the Medialens forum discussion board. As someone who has both sought out non-mainstream sources of news, and followed the 911 debate closely for about ten years, I was both surprised and fascinated that the OffG editors decided to mark the 15 year anniversary by taking on this controversy. I think it is indisputable that there is a definitely identifiable taboo that surrounds any critical approach to examining the events of 911, and in light of the general silence amongst most alt media commentators, my first thoughts were that OffG have been admirably brave to break that ‘spiral of silence’. It is interesting to read how this recent anniversary has been marked. The mass media has been relatively quiet about it, and so have many dissenting voices online. It is as if the elephant in the room has reproduced into a small herd over the past decade and a half. The position that is defined by unreserved acceptance of the official …
by Kevin Ryan My last blog post was wrong. As of a week ago, it does matter who is elected president. That’s because one of the candidates has openly called for a new investigation into the crimes of 9/11. In a recent statement on the subject, Jill Stein made the following important comments and promises: “….The families and friends of those who were murdered on 9/11 deserve justice. They also deserve to know the truth…” “…Under our administration a new inquiry would have access to the considerable body of responsible independent research that has emerged over the last 15 years….” “…We would create an independent 9/11 Commission, not one dominated by members with an interest in protecting the reputation and careers of foreign affairs and intelligence communities…” “…It’s time for a full accounting of what happened, and an end to the misguided post-9/11 wars that are actually making us less safe, not more safe…” In May, a national poll showed that, “An unprecedented 91 percent of voters 28 or younger favor having an independent on …
…This bogus assumption that steel has zero thermal conductivity not only renders the NIST report as a whole deeply suspect, it entirely nullifies even the flawed basis for its “collapse by fire” hypothesis….
by Joe Giambrone You probably didn’t hear from your corporate media that those 28 pages concerning Saudi state support to the September 11th suicide-hijackers have been released to the public. Or if you had, you would have most likely heard only the Saudi spin, published widely, and parroted by Barack Obama’s spokespeople, that the pages don’t mean anything. One might ask of those 28 pages: if they didn’t mean anything in the first place then why cover them up for fifteen years until the population mostly forgot about them? This September 11th, if you actually read the pages yourself, they might wind up meaning quite a lot to you. Couched in Congressional weasel-words, “may have” being repeated throughout, the report is a shocking eye-opener. It was likely the catalyst for the September 9unanimous House of Representatives vote to pass JASTA, the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. A single paragraph from the long-censored Congressional Joint Inquiry chapter should convey a sense of the disgraceful cover-up as it now stands: “Osama Bassnan. …Bassnan was a close …
from OffG on Youtube edited Steve Spak’s film of WTC7 prior to its collapse has been cited in the comments here as evidence the building was blazing “out of control” prior to collapse. Given this it seems appropriate to give this video a place in our series, to allow people to appreciate this crucial piece of evidence, and decide for themselves if this claim is true. Prior to 9/11 no steel frame high rise building had ever collapsed completely as a result of fire, nor has one done so since. NIST’s fire-induced collapse theory for WTC 1, 2 and 7 therefore describes a unique event that needs to be carefully examined. Please note neither the building seen dimly blazing in the distance at one point nor the shorter building seen in the foreground latin the video are WTC7. WTC7 is the taller reddish building with fires visible on two floors. For comparison here are two other high rise buildings on fire – neither of which collapsed as a result. In light of some of the …
by Harvey Burgess I recently had an upsetting exchange with a good friend, brought about by my assertion that: “The Americans did 9-11 to themselves.” My remark brought to an abrupt end a perfectly calm and rational discussion, over dinner, about Geo-Politics. I saw a side of my friend I had never seen before. If I had confessed to hacking into his bank account and stealing a thousand pounds he could not have been angrier. He was extremely hostile and refused to engage with me on the subject. Let me admit straight away that this was not the first time that my opinion on 9-11 had landed me in deep water with friends and family. “Why not avoid the topic?” I hear you ask. Well, often I do but, on occasion, when the conversation moves in a certain direction, I feel compelled to express my views. What is extraordinary to me is that otherwise rational, discourse-loving people completely shut down when it comes to 9-11 and treat me as though I am some kind of …
from Press For Truth In 2011, experts and scientists from around the world gathered in Toronto, Canada to present new and established evidence that questions the official story of 9/11. This evidence was presented to a distinguished panel of experts over a 4 day period. Through their analysis and scientific investigations, they hope to spark a new investigation into the attacks of September 11, 2001. Dr. Niels Harrit is a former professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and is one of the key authors of the WTC nano-thermite paper. In light of some of the disruptive and time-wasting commentary on these science-based 9/11 threads, we are asking everyone who makes claims of fact to post links or sources, be courteous, and stay on topic. Thanks….
by Rebecca Barrigos from redflag.org.au September marks 15 years since the US state turned the tragedy of the World Trade Centre attacks into a justification for years of brutality and horror inflicted on the population of the Middle East. The “war on terror”, launched by the administration of president George W. Bush in the weeks following 9/11, revealed the naked barbarity of US imperialism. It extended far beyond the borders of Afghanistan, where the US first invaded, to subject the populations of Iraq, Yemen, Pakistan and beyond to sickening violence. This war was never about delivering democracy or protecting human rights; it was always about expanding US power. The US state saw an opportunity to occupy and reshape the Middle East in order to control its oil reserves, thereby obtaining leverage against economic rivals and ensuring the future profitability and dominance of the US economy. The Iraqi city of Fallujah is testament to the human toll of the project. It has been razed three times since the US first occupied in 2003. Once home to …
